DO not depending on avijja and sankhara?

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
Post Reply
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 16498
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: DO not depending on avijja and sankhara?

Post by mikenz66 » Sun May 01, 2011 11:39 pm

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings Mike,
mikenz66 wrote:I see absolutely no contradiction between phenomenology and long time scales (multiple lifetimes, universes, etc, etc).
Neither do I, so long as you can experience them and relate them to present experiences.... but I know I can't 'experience' other lives, nor 'experience' other universes. If any people involved in this discussion can, well, good for them. :thumbsup:
So you're not just talking about just phenomenology. You're adding this "instant gratification" idea, which is another concept altogether. I don't see how phenomenology, in itself, restricts us to the present moment.

Even within this lifetime, we are (generally) talking about developments that take months, years, decades, requiring faith in the Dhamma, effort, etc, etc.... Just because we don't experience nibbana (or previous lives for that matter) right in this particular moment doesn't rule out such experience in the future. I can't (yet) fully test the Buddha's teaching in this particular moment...

:anjali:
Mike

User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 16498
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: DO not depending on avijja and sankhara?

Post by mikenz66 » Sun May 01, 2011 11:51 pm

retrofuturist wrote: Is this to imply that the Buddha himself did not experientially know that jati had ended, whilst still alive? Was the jubilant statement 'jati has ended!' of the arahants merely a 'thought experiment'?
It's perfectly logical that one could know that 'jati has ended' in the sense of a knowledge that there will be no jati in the future.

As we discussed above:
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 00#p127073" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
MN 140 wrote: He understands: ‘On the dissolution of the body, with the ending of life, all that is felt, not being delighted in, will become cool right here.’
:anjali:
Mike

User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 20167
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: DO not depending on avijja and sankhara?

Post by retrofuturist » Sun May 01, 2011 11:52 pm

Greetings Mike,
mikenz66 wrote:So you're not just talking about just phenomenology. You're adding this "instant gratification" idea, which is another concept altogether.
I don't understand the basis for this "instant gratification" assessment. What I'm saying is that you need to be able to see the causality and relationships involved - in other words, the structures of the nidanas, in their arising and cessation modes. If you can't see them, you're just 'believing' them out of faith. Belief is fine, but it's putting them into practice to attain knowledge which is important.
mikenz66 wrote:I don't see how phenomenology, in itself, restricts us to the present moment.
As I just said in the last post, neither do I. Sati (memory) can be used, and is arguably essential in terms of associating cause with effect (i.e. seeing this/that conditionality).
mikenz66 wrote:Even within this lifetime, we are (generally) talking about developments that take months, years, decades, requiring faith in the Dhamma, effort, etc, etc.... Just because we don't experience nibbana (or previous lives for that matter) right in this particular moment doesn't rule out such experience in the future. I can't (yet) fully test the Buddha's teaching in this particular moment...
No problems with any of that, but we can see the arising of cessation of nidanas one by one, all the way back to vinnana and nama-rupa, even as putujjanas (unless of course, one holds a definition of the dependent origination terms which precludes the ability to see them here-and-now).

Of course, it's only temporary observation, but it's enough to "know" that the this/that conditionality associated with the nidanas is true, rather than simply having faith that it is so.

Metta,
Retro. :)
"Do not force others, including children, by any means whatsoever, to adopt your views, whether by authority, threat, money, propaganda, or even education." - Ven. Thich Nhat Hanh

"The uprooting of identity is seen by the noble ones as pleasurable; but this contradicts what the whole world sees." (Snp 3.12)

"One discerns wrong view as wrong view, and right view as right view. This is one's right view." (MN 117)

User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 20167
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: DO not depending on avijja and sankhara?

Post by retrofuturist » Sun May 01, 2011 11:59 pm

Greetings Mike,
mikenz66 wrote:It's perfectly logical that one could know that 'jati has ended' in the sense of a knowledge that there will be no jati in the future.
Indeed it is.... but only if you have seen jati arise, know what it is, know that it is always caused by bhava and that you can see that you've done what needs to be done in order to prevent bhava (and thus jati) from arising in the future.

Even if jati is regarded as "literal post-mortem rebirth", then the Buddha could have known it, based on his knowledge of previous lives.

However, based on the suttas it is seen that arahantship can be attained without knowledge of previous lives, so on what basis would "jati has ended"(if regarded as "literal post-mortem rebirth") be known for such an arahant whose memory extends only to this lifetime? How has such an arahant ever seen jati arise, let alone know that they have done what is needed to prevent its future arising?
Leigh Brasington wrote:Dig deep - this is a rich vein, there is much to learn here if you can approach it with an open mind and lack of fixed concepts.
(Source: http://www.leighb.com/deporg1.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; )
Metta,
Retro. :)
"Do not force others, including children, by any means whatsoever, to adopt your views, whether by authority, threat, money, propaganda, or even education." - Ven. Thich Nhat Hanh

"The uprooting of identity is seen by the noble ones as pleasurable; but this contradicts what the whole world sees." (Snp 3.12)

"One discerns wrong view as wrong view, and right view as right view. This is one's right view." (MN 117)

User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 16498
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: DO not depending on avijja and sankhara?

Post by mikenz66 » Mon May 02, 2011 12:29 am

retrofuturist wrote:
mikenz66 wrote:It's perfectly logical that one could know that 'jati has ended' in the sense of a knowledge that there will be no jati in the future.
Indeed it is.... but only if you have seen jati arise, know what it is, know that it is always caused by bhava and that you can see that you've done what needs to be done in order to prevent bhava (and thus jati) from arising in the future.

Even if jati is regarded as "literal post-mortem rebirth", then the Buddha could have known it, based on his knowledge of previous lives.

However, based on the suttas it is seen that arahantship can be attained without knowledge of previous lives, so on what basis would "jati has ended"(if regarded as "literal post-mortem rebirth") be known for such an arahant whose memory extends only to this lifetime? How has such an arahant ever seen jati arise, let alone know that they have done what is needed to prevent its future arising?
I think we'll just have to agree to disagree on this. I simply don't accept your reasoning:
How has such an arahant ever seen jati arise, let alone know that they have done what is needed to prevent its future arising?
What matters is that he knows that he has done what is needed to prevent its future arising, not that he knows it in the particular way you seem to be assuming.

If I come across a fire, and put it out by pouring water on it, I'm confident that it's out. I don't need to have direct experience of how it started to know that. Which, according to the Buddha, is not possible anyway:
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
"From an inconstruable beginning comes transmigration. A beginning point is not evident, though beings hindered by ignorance and fettered by craving are transmigrating & wandering on."
:anjali:
Mike

User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 20167
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: DO not depending on avijja and sankhara?

Post by retrofuturist » Mon May 02, 2011 12:39 am

Greetings Mike,
mikenz66 wrote:If I come across a fire, and put it out by pouring water on it, I'm confident that it's out. I don't need to have direct experience of how it started to know that.
But you do know, Mike.... flame and fuel. And when you are confident, you are confident because you have extinguished the flame, and/or rendered the fuel inoperable. If you had no idea of the causality involved, the confidence in relation to the fire staying out would simply be "faith" on your part.

To give an example pertinent to the Dhamma, during deep jhana, the asavas are suppressed... does that mean that once suppressed they will not return once jhana ceases? No. Knowledge of the causality involved is required in order to make a proper assessment and to actually know.
mikenz66 wrote:I don't need to have direct experience of how it started to know that. Which, according to the Buddha, is not possible anyway
We will certainly have to agree to disagree then, and in this particular instance it seems to be based primarily on different understandings of what jati means.

P.S. Re: SN 15.9, do you know what Pali word is being rendered here as "transmigration"?

Metta,
Retro. :)
"Do not force others, including children, by any means whatsoever, to adopt your views, whether by authority, threat, money, propaganda, or even education." - Ven. Thich Nhat Hanh

"The uprooting of identity is seen by the noble ones as pleasurable; but this contradicts what the whole world sees." (Snp 3.12)

"One discerns wrong view as wrong view, and right view as right view. This is one's right view." (MN 117)

User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 20167
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: DO not depending on avijja and sankhara?

Post by retrofuturist » Mon May 02, 2011 12:56 am

Greetings,

Something relevant to the topic of whether there can be "DO not depending on avijja and sankhara", from Leigh Brasington - http://www.leighb.com/deporg1.htm#cc" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
But look what happens when you lay the "cessation chain" on top of the 3 Lives Model: With the ceasing of Ignorance in your previous life, there is the ceasing of Sankharas in your previous life. Therefore since the Sankharas ceased, your Consciousness and Mind & Body have ceased in this life. Oh wait, if you are reading this, then I guess your Consciousness and Mind & Body have not ceased in this life! So in order to get free of Dukkha in your next life, you need to go back to your previous life and generate the "remainderless fading & cessation of ignorance." This does present a serious problem - the way out of Dukkha is to banish Ignorance in a previous life so that in the next life after that previous life you won't have Consciousness and Mind & Body so thus you can avoid Craving and Clinging so you won't have a life after the life after you banished Ignorance! This make NO sense whatsoever.
Metta,
Retro. :)
"Do not force others, including children, by any means whatsoever, to adopt your views, whether by authority, threat, money, propaganda, or even education." - Ven. Thich Nhat Hanh

"The uprooting of identity is seen by the noble ones as pleasurable; but this contradicts what the whole world sees." (Snp 3.12)

"One discerns wrong view as wrong view, and right view as right view. This is one's right view." (MN 117)

Sylvester
Posts: 2205
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:57 am

Re: DO not depending on avijja and sankhara?

Post by Sylvester » Mon May 02, 2011 1:21 am

mikenz66 wrote:
retrofuturist wrote: Is this to imply that the Buddha himself did not experientially know that jati had ended, whilst still alive? Was the jubilant statement 'jati has ended!' of the arahants merely a 'thought experiment'?
It's perfectly logical that one could know that 'jati has ended' in the sense of a knowledge that there will be no jati in the future.

As we discussed above:
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 00#p127073" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
MN 140 wrote: He understands: ‘On the dissolution of the body, with the ending of life, all that is felt, not being delighted in, will become cool right here.’
:anjali:
Mike

I think the suttas are with you on this, Mike. Inferential knowledge of DO is knowledge of DO, and that seems to be good enough for Stream Entry.

In the Kosambi Sutta, SN 12.68, both Ven Musila and Ven Narada demonstrate personal knowledge of DO and DC, including personal knowledge that "Nibbana is the cessation of existence". However, when questioned if the last-mentioned knowledge implied Arahanta, Ven Narada said NO and gave this simile -
Suppose, friend, there was a well along a desert road, but it had neither a rope or a bucket. Then a man would come along, oppressed and afflicted by the heat, tired, parched and thirsty. He would look down into the well and the knowledge would occur to him, "There is water", but he would not be able to make bodily contact with it. So too, friend, though I have clearly seen as it really is with correct wisdom, "Nibbana is the cessation of existence", I am not an Arahant, one whose taints are destroyed.
The "making bodily contact with it" phrase is well-known in the context of an Arahant, where other suttas describe how he/she dwells touching with his/her body Nibbana or the highest truth etc (kayena phusitva viharati).

Sylvester
Posts: 2205
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:57 am

Re: DO not depending on avijja and sankhara?

Post by Sylvester » Mon May 02, 2011 1:33 am

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings,

Something relevant to the topic of whether there can be "DO not depending on avijja and sankhara", from Leigh Brasington - http://www.leighb.com/deporg1.htm#cc" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
But look what happens when you lay the "cessation chain" on top of the 3 Lives Model: With the ceasing of Ignorance in your previous life, there is the ceasing of Sankharas in your previous life. Therefore since the Sankharas ceased, your Consciousness and Mind & Body have ceased in this life. Oh wait, if you are reading this, then I guess your Consciousness and Mind & Body have not ceased in this life! So in order to get free of Dukkha in your next life, you need to go back to your previous life and generate the "remainderless fading & cessation of ignorance." This does present a serious problem - the way out of Dukkha is to banish Ignorance in a previous life so that in the next life after that previous life you won't have Consciousness and Mind & Body so thus you can avoid Craving and Clinging so you won't have a life after the life after you banished Ignorance! This make NO sense whatsoever.
Metta,
Retro. :)
A fairly useless reductio ad absurdum from Mr Brasington. He's obviously oblivious to the suttas that explain that the sankhara-vinnana nidana was for the explication of the "establishment of consciousness" and "descent of namarupa". Or did he bother addressing those "establishment of consciousness" and "descent of namarupa" suttas?

And again, the banishment of Avijja in a past life can easily happen with Stream Entry. And his reductio is based on the premise that DC must proceed over 3 time periods just like DO. Why force this attribute to DC, just because it is used for DO?

Sylvester
Posts: 2205
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:57 am

Re: DO not depending on avijja and sankhara?

Post by Sylvester » Mon May 02, 2011 1:35 am

retrofuturist wrote:P.S. Re: SN 15.9, do you know what Pali word is being rendered here as "transmigration"?
Samsara.

User avatar
retrofuturist
Site Admin
Posts: 20167
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: DO not depending on avijja and sankhara?

Post by retrofuturist » Mon May 02, 2011 1:53 am

Greetings Sylvester,
Sylvester wrote:Samsara.
Thanks for that. :thumbsup:

(For anyone interested in how I would regard 'samsara' (lit. wandering on) without recourse to 'transmigration', I did so back here - http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 40#p129331" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; )

Metta,
Retro. :)
"Do not force others, including children, by any means whatsoever, to adopt your views, whether by authority, threat, money, propaganda, or even education." - Ven. Thich Nhat Hanh

"The uprooting of identity is seen by the noble ones as pleasurable; but this contradicts what the whole world sees." (Snp 3.12)

"One discerns wrong view as wrong view, and right view as right view. This is one's right view." (MN 117)

User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 16498
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: DO not depending on avijja and sankhara?

Post by mikenz66 » Mon May 02, 2011 1:55 am

Drat, Beat me to it.

Hint: There is a link to the Pali from the Translations on ATI:

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
"From an inconstruable beginning comes transmigration.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... ml#pts.184" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Anamataggoyaṃ bhikkhave, saṃsāro.

And I completely agree with Sylvester that Leigh's logic is absurd. This is also related to the other perennial, whether the Arahant still has dukkha, and what ceases at Nibbana, and what at the breakup of the body:
http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=6382" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I'm happy with the idea that the Arahant knows that there will be no re-arising with the breakup of the body. I don't see that everything has to have disappeared before then.

:anjali:
Mike

User avatar
piotr
Posts: 406
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 4:33 pm
Location: Khettadesa

Re: DO not depending on avijja and sankhara?

Post by piotr » Mon May 02, 2011 3:26 pm

Hi Retrofuturist,
retrofuturist wrote:But then, dependent origination would not be as useful. Alternatively one could just use the Four Noble Truths.
What do you mean by that?
Bhagavaṃmūlakā no, bhante, dhammā...

User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23044
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: DO not depending on avijja and sankhara?

Post by tiltbillings » Mon May 02, 2011 3:40 pm

piotr wrote:Hi Retrofuturist,
retrofuturist wrote:But then, dependent origination would not be as useful. Alternatively one could just use the Four Noble Truths.
What do you mean by that?
Damdifino, but the FNT are built upon the same principle as paticcasamuppada:

This being, that becomes; from the arising of this, that arises; this not becoming, that does not become; from the ceasing of this, that ceases. -- MN II 32; SN II 28. Understanding one is to understand the other.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723

User avatar
piotr
Posts: 406
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 4:33 pm
Location: Khettadesa

Re: DO not depending on avijja and sankhara?

Post by piotr » Mon May 02, 2011 5:03 pm

Hi Tiltbillings,
tiltbillings wrote:Damdifino, but the FNT are built upon the same principle as paticcasamuppada:

This being, that becomes; from the arising of this, that arises; this not becoming, that does not become; from the ceasing of this, that ceases. -- MN II 32; SN II 28. Understanding one is to understand the other.
Actually, paṭiccasamuppāda anuloma is the second noble truth & paṭiccasamuppāda paṭiloma is the third noble truth (see AN i 176).
Bhagavaṃmūlakā no, bhante, dhammā...

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: auto, Google [Bot], Yahoo [Bot] and 108 guests